Misplaced Pages

#148851

38-623: The appellant applied for an import license and was refused. The appellant challenged the import licensing regime (Regulation 2107/74) in the Frankfurt Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht), but the case was dismissed. The court held that the regulation was passed in accordance with the objectives of art. 39 EC (art. 45 TFEU). The case was appealed to the Federal Supreme Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht), which suspended

76-641: A "renewable 6-year term, jointly by national governments". The CJEU's specific mission is to ensure that "the law is observed" "in the interpretation and application" of the Treaties of the European Union . To achieve this, it: The composition and functioning of the courts are regulated by the Rules of Procedure. The CJEU was originally established in 1951 as a single court called the Court of Justice of

114-554: A body with both first instance and last instance powers. The case before the domestic court will be adjourned until the ECJ ruling is issued. The question to the ECJ must be short and succinct, but it may be accompanied by documents explaining the issue's context and circumstances. There is provision for litigants to comment on the reference: for example, in the case of pressetext Nachrichtenagentur GmbH v Republik Österreich (case C-454/06),

152-606: A jurisdiction must refer and lower courts may refer to Article 267 TFEU. For the rules in the United Kingdom while it was an EU member state, see s 2(1) European Communities Act 1972 and Part 68 Civil Procedure Rules. Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), establishing the preliminary reference procedure, differentiates between the right and the duty of national courts to seek

190-459: A member state before its EU accession if the agreement conflicts with EU law: Case C-158/91 Levy . The ECJ has jurisdiction confined to EU law and cannot consider the extent of reference to EU law by national provisions, which are a matter of national law: Case C-297/88 Dzodzi at 42. The ECJ does not interpret national law that is worded identically to EU provisions: Case C-346/93 Kleinwort Benson v City of Glasgow District Council . The ECJ

228-466: A number of issues into account: whether it is established by law is permanent, has compulsory jurisdiction, has an inter partes procedure, applies rules of law and is independent. Only a body that "is established by law... is permanent... [whose] jurisdiction is compulsory... [whose] procedure is inter partes... applies rules of law and... is independent" can be a court or tribunal that may refer: Case C-53/03 Syfait v GlaxoSmithKlein at 29. A body with

266-466: A preliminary ruling when a question of the interpretation of EU law arises is subject to certain exceptions. In accordance with the jurisprudence of the Court, a national court is relieved from the duty to refer when questions of EU law are not relevant to the decision in the main proceedings, if a national court is "materially identical with a question which has already been subject of a preliminary ruling in

304-521: A preliminary ruling. Under the discretionary reference stipulated in Article 267(2) TFEU, a national "court or tribunal" may ask the ECJ to give a preliminary ruling if it considers that a decision on the question is "necessary" to enable it to judge a particular case. The obligatory reference (duty to refer) is established in two cases: with respect to national courts adjudicating at last instance (Article 267(3) TFEU) and with respect of all courts faced with

342-438: A question is raised before any court or tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal may, if it considers that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it to give judgment, request the Court to give a ruling thereon. Where any such question is raised in a case pending before a court or tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, that court or tribunal shall bring

380-526: A question of the validity of EU law. The function of the obligation to refer is "to prevent a body of national case law not in accord with the rules of [EU] law from coming into existence in any member state": Case 107/76 Hoffmann-La Roche v Centrafarm at 5. Both the highest court in a member state and the Benelux court has the obligation to refer: Case C-337/95 Parfums Christian Dior v Evora . The obligation of national courts of last instance to refer for

418-450: A similar case" ( 'acte éclairé ' ) or if when the proper interpretation of EU law is "so obvious as to leave no scope for any reasonable doubt".( ' acte clair ' ). What constitutes a "court or tribunal" is a matter of EU law and is not to be determined by reference to national law. In determining whether or not a body is a "court or tribunal of Member State", the EU courts take

SECTION 10

#1732773210149

456-520: Is also competent regarding the application of certain treaties between EU member states but may be subject to different procedures. Two such treaties are the 1968 Brussels Convention on jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters and the 1980 Rome Convention on applicable law, which are now mostly replaced by the Brussels I and the Rome I Regulations, respectively. A peculiarity relates to arbitration on

494-422: Is given in response to a request (a preliminary reference ) from a court or a tribunal of a member state . A preliminary ruling is a final determination of European Union law, with no scope for appeal. The ECJ hands down its decision to the referring court, which is then obliged to implement the ruling. Preliminary rulings are issued by the ECJ. The Treaty of Lisbon provides that jurisdiction may be delegated to

532-663: Is the judicial branch of the European Union (EU). Seated in the Kirchberg quarter of Luxembourg City , Luxembourg , this EU institution consists of two separate courts: the Court of Justice and the General Court . From 2005 to 2016, it also contained the Civil Service Tribunal . It has a sui generis court system, meaning 'of its own kind', and is a supranational institution. The CJEU

570-500: Is the chief judicial authority of the EU and oversees the uniform application and interpretation of European Union law , in co-operation with the national judiciary of the member states. The CJEU also resolves legal disputes between national governments and EU institutions, and may take action against EU institutions on behalf of individuals, companies or organisations whose rights have been infringed. The CJEU consists of two major courts: Judges and advocate generals are appointed for

608-440: Is then res judicata (at least in the weak sense) and binds the national court a quo that made the reference, and future similar cases on the same issue require no further reference if the answer is "so obvious as to leave no scope for any reasonable doubt": Case 283/81 CILFIT , ECJ Rules of Procedure Article 104(3) . "Where national legislation has been the subject of different relevant judicial constructions, some leading to

646-608: The Austria Press Agency (APA) and its subsidiary APA-OTS criticised the reference as "complex and not readily comprehensible". The ECJ may decline to give judgement in the absence of a genuine dispute on the basis that it will not consider "general or hypothetical questions". Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides: The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings concerning: Where such

684-572: The Brexit withdrawal agreement since arbiters must ask for a preliminary ruling in matters of EU law that is binding upon both the EU and the UK. Based on the same agreement, UK courts must or may ask for a preliminary ruling regarding how Northern Ireland has EU law applied, which is related mainly to trade in goods. The ECJ judgment in a reference is declaratory, and remedies, costs, etc. are matters for national courts. The ECJ may choose to rule only on

722-666: The European Convention on Human Rights . In view of these developments, it must be held that, so long as the European Communities ( Solange die Europäischen Gemeinschaften... ) and in particular the case law of the European Court, generally ensure an effective protection of fundamental rights as against the sovereign powers of the Communities which is to be regarded as substantially similar to

760-461: The GATT for which EU has substituted its member states: Case C-267/81 SPI . That also applies to mixed agreements even if the issue only partly falls within EU law: 61996CJ0053 at 32. The ECJ claims jurisdiction even over acts of institutions established by an association agreement: Case C-192/89 Sevince . In contrast, the claim does not extend to an international agreement that was concluded by

798-497: The General Court , but that provision has yet to be put into effect. If, as in Factortame , the ECJ holds that a member state's legislation conflicts with EU law, the member state is required to "disapply" such law, but the ECJ may not amend the member state's legislation itself. Preliminary rulings make up the bulk of business in the Court of Justice of the European Union since few persons have locus standi to litigate in

SECTION 20

#1732773210149

836-405: The ECJ will not hear preliminary references arising out of hypothetical disputes: Case 244/80 Foglia v Novello . The ECJ requires the referring court to "define the factual and legal context of the questions it is asking or, at the very least, explain the assumptions of fact on which those questions are based" so that the ECJ can assist the national court. The ECJ is competent to give rulings on

874-757: The European Coal and Steel Communities. With the Euratom and the European Economic Community in 1957 its name changed to the Court of Justice of the European Communities ( CJEC ). In 1988 the Court requested the Commission to create a Court of First Instance and in 2004 it added the Civil Service Tribunal. The Civil Service Tribunal are for issues of public employment. The Treaty of Lisbon in 2009 renamed

912-639: The European courts. The Solange Doctrine of the GFCC spurred the ECJ and EU institutions to eventually develop their own systems of fundamental rights protection, offering an equal or higher level of protection than the German Basic Law. Preliminary reference A preliminary ruling is a decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on the interpretation of European Union law that

950-752: The Federal Republic of Germany, and it will no longer review such legislation by the standard of the fundamental rights contained in the Constitution. This in effect meant that the authority of the ECJ in Germany was accepted by the Federal Court, so long as the ECJ rulings conformed to the principles of German national law. In contrast to the earlier Solange I decision, the Federal Constitutional Court accepted

988-506: The Luxembourg court. "Privileged parties" with standing include all member states and EU institutions, but a private person or "undertaking" has standing only if it is the addressee of an EU decision . If a court or tribunal of a member state finds a provision of EU law to be ambiguous, equivocal or unclear, it may seek a preliminary ruling, and a court or tribunal from which there is no appeal must make an application: this may include

1026-409: The application of that legislation in compliance with [EU] law, others leading to the opposite application, it must be held that, at the very least, such legislation is not sufficiently clear to ensure its application in compliance with [EU] law": Case C-129/00 Commission v Italy at 33. The ECJ judgment has the force of res judicata and is binding not only on the national court on whose initiative

1064-530: The case and sent a preliminary reference to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The ECJ responded that the regulation was valid. In response, the appellant appealed to the German Federal Constitutional Court (GFCC, BVerfG, Bundesverfassungsgericht), citing several breaches of German constitutional rights. The appellant claimed that, following with the judgment of Solange I , the GFCC should disapply EU law which conflicts with

1102-548: The fundamental rights protection afforded in the German Basic Law (Grundgesetz). The Federal Constitutional Court ( Bundesverfassungsgericht ) ultimately rejected the complaint. It considered, since the 1974 Solange I decision, the ECJ ’s development of protection for fundamental rights, the adoption of declarations on rights and democracy by the Community institutions, and that all EC Member States had acceded to

1140-520: The instruments adopted based on it are also invalid. It then falls to the competent European institutions to adopt a new instrument to rectify the situation. The possibility to ask for a preliminary ruling is also embedded in other legal systems: Court of Justice of the European Union The Court of Justice of the European Union ( CJEU ) ( French : Cour de justice de l'Union européenne or " CJUE "; Latin : Curia )

1178-482: The interpretation of treaties to which the EU is a party, as those treaties are considered to be part of EU law. Decisions of the ECJ are in such a case binding only on the EU, not the other parties to the agreement. The ECJ claims jurisdiction to interpret international agreements concluded by the Council of the European Union since they are acts of an EU institution: Case 181/73 Haegeman v Belgium . That extends to

Solange II - Misplaced Pages Continue

1216-533: The judgment of the ECJ as binding and final in Germany. It is notable that the GFCC did not give up its competence to scrutinize EU law in light of the German Basic Law 's fundamental rights. Rather they suspended this scrutiny, to be renewed if a case could demonstrate a decline of fundamental rights standards in the EU below those guaranteed by the Basic Law. Additionally, both Solange I and Solange II demonstrate an atmosphere of constructive argument within

1254-440: The matter before the Court. If such a question is raised in a case pending before a court or tribunal of a Member State with regard to a person in custody, the Court of Justice of the European Union shall act with the minimum of delay. That is qualified by Article 275 (excluding Common Foreign and Security Policy ) and Article 276 (excluding member state acts in the area of freedom, security and justice ). The highest court in

1292-505: The protection of fundamental rights required unconditionally by the Constitution, and in so far as they generally safeguard the essential content of fundamental rights, the Federal Constitutional Court will no longer exercise its jurisdiction to decide on the applicability of secondary Community legislation cited as the legal basis for any acts of German civil courts or authorities within the sovereign jurisdiction of

1330-411: The reference for a preliminary ruling was made but also on all member states' national courts. In the United Kingdom when it was a member state, res judicata was in the strong sense: a previous ECJ ruling would bind of its courts: s 3(1) European Communities Act 1972 . In the context of a reference for a preliminary ruling concerning validity, if the European instrument is declared invalid, all of

1368-589: The right to refer under EU law cannot be deprived of it by national law: Cases 146/73 and 166/73 Rheinmühlen . However, those criteria are not absolute. In Broekmeulen v Huisarts Registratie Commissie , the CJEU ruled that a body established under the auspices of the Royal Netherlands Society for the Promotion of Medicine was a "court or tribunal" within the meaning of the treaty even though

1406-609: The society was a private association. Also, the Benelux Court of Justice was considered a court within that context as a court common to several (Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg) member states. Also, the Unified Patent Court , as a court common to several member states is expected to have the ability to ask prejudicial questions. Such a reference is possible for all EU acts regardless of direct effect : Case C-373/95 Maso and Others v INPS at 28. However,

1444-436: The validity and the interpretation of EU law and to leave the application to the facts to the national court that made the reference: Case 36/74 Walrave and Koch v Union Cycliste Internationale . Alternatively, it may choose to rule very closely to the facts in the case: Case 32/75 Cristini v SNCF . If the ECJ already ruled on a point in a previous case, there is no obligation to refer: Case 28/62 Da Costa . The decision

#148851